THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT CASE NO: 431/06 THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE
|
|
- Annabel Banks
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT CASE NO: 431/06 Reportable In the matter between THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE APPELLANT and THE BAKING TIN (PTY) LTD RESPONDENT CORAM: SCOTT, BRAND, LEWIS, MAYA JJA, MHLANTLA AJA HEARD: 17 AUGUST 2007 DELIVERED: 14 September 2007 SUMMARY: Tariff determination by Commissioner in respect of aluminium containers confirmed: intention of importer as to use not a determinant of objective characteristics of containers. This case may be referred to as CSARS v The Baking Tin [2007] SCA 100 (RSA) LEWIS JA
2 2 [1] When is an aluminium container used for cooking or baking not a kitchen article? That is the question raised in this appeal. More precisely, are aluminium foil containers imported by the respondent, The Baking Tin (Pty) Ltd, table, kitchen or other household articles for the purpose of levying customs and anti-dumping duties under the Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964? The Baking Tin imported the aluminium containers from Hong Kong as catering consumables which were supplied to manufacturers for the preparation and packaging of pies and other pre-cooked foods. The dispute between the parties centres on the customs tariff applicable to the containers. The Baking Tin contends that they are not dutiable, being consumables. The appellant, the Commissioner, who is charged with the implementation of the Act, determined, on the other hand, that the aluminium containers constituted hollowware for table or kitchen use, dutiable at the rate of 30 per cent and liable to anti-dumping duty. [2] An appeal to the Commissioner against that determination failed, but an appeal in terms of s 47(9)(e) of the Act to the Cape High Court succeeded. The Commissioner s determination was set aside by Foxcroft J. It is against his decision that the Commissioner now appeals, with leave of this court. [3] The relevant chapter (76) of the Schedule to the Act is headed Aluminium and Articles Thereof. The heading in issue is It reads: Table, kitchen or other household articles and parts thereof, of aluminium; Pot scourers and scouring or polishing pads, gloves and the like, of aluminium; sanitary ware and parts thereof, of aluminium: Hollowware for table or kitchen use (excluding buckets) - 30% Other % [4] The explanatory notes to state that the heading covers the same type of articles as are described in the explanatory notes to headings 73.23
3 3 and 73.24, particularly the kitchen utensils, sanitary and toilet articles described therein. Heading deals with table, kitchen or other household articles and parts thereof, of iron or steel. The note to Table, kitchen or other household articles and parts thereof state: This group comprises a wide range of iron or steel articles, not more specifically covered by other headings of the Nomenclature, used for table, kitchen or other household purposes; it includes the same goods for use in hotels, restaurants, boarding-houses, hospitals, canteens, barracks, etc. Further: The group includes (1) Articles for kitchen use such as saucepans, steamers, pressure cookers, preserving pans, stew pans, casseroles, fish kettles; basins; frying pans, roasting or baking dishes and plates;... (2) Articles for table use such as trays, dishes, plates, soup or vegetable dishes... (my emphasis). [5] The principles applicable in determining whether articles fall under a particular classification are by now well-settled. In International Business Machines SA (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for Customs and Excise 1 Nicholas AJA said: The process of classification Classification as between headings is a three-stage process: first, interpretation the ascertainment of the meaning of the words used in the headings (and relevant section and chapter notes) which may be relevant to the classification of the goods concerned; second, consideration of the nature and characteristics of those goods; and third, the selection of the heading which is most appropriate to such goods. The court also had regard, as one must, to the General Rules for the Interpretation of the Harmonized System (the Brussels Notes), Rule 1 of which states that for legal purposes, classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes and, (4) SA 852 (A) at 863F-H.
4 4 provided such headings or notes do not otherwise require, according to the following provisions. [6] The explanatory notes are not, however, peremptory injunctions. In Secretary for Customs and Excise v Thomas Barlow & Sons Ltd 2 Trollip JA said that they are not worded with the linguistic precision usually characteristic of statutory precepts; on the contrary they consist mainly of discursive comment and illustrations. See also Lewis Stores (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance. 3 [7] The contentions of The Baking Tin are, first, that the containers imported by them are not durable, and therefore do not fall under 76.15: they are not table, kitchen or other household articles. Second, even if they do fall under the heading, they do not constitute hollowware. The essence of the first argument is that they are not intended for ongoing household use. The aluminium containers are consumables, contends The Baking Tin: they are supplied to manufacturers of food for the purpose of preparing food for the consumer who ordinarily disposes of them once the food is consumed. They cannot thus be classified as kitchen or household articles. [8] This argument was accepted by Foxcroft J in the high court who considered that the articles described in the notes to (above), by contrast, are of a permanent or semi-permanent nature. He said: Durability is a feature of all these items and speaks for itself. Obviously, for example, teapots made out of thin aluminium foil would not last very long. When one has regard to the category of items listed, it becomes clear that to call a container usually coming into the kitchen as packaging, a roasting pan after it has fulfilled its primary purpose, is not only a distortion of language, but a denial of the nature and characteristics of this container (2) SA 660 (A) at 676C-D (2003) SATC 172 paras 3-9.
5 5 The learned judge accordingly found that the articles in question did not fall under tariff heading and thus made no finding as to whether the containers constituted hollowware. [9] The court found that the items imported by The Baking Tin fell under tariff sub-heading Other articles of aluminium. Other which attract neither anti-dumping nor customs duty. It thus set aside the Commissioner s determination. [10] The Baking Tin argues that this finding is correct: the containers are designed for the purpose of packaging and intended for use once, when the consumer uses the food prepared in it, even if the food in the container is cooked or heated up. It contends that these containers are different from those available for use in kitchens where the consumer buys the container and prepares and cooks food in it. It contrasts its imports with those of a local manufacturer which are sold in supermarkets and are more durable and therefore more suitable for use in the household and kitchen. The Baking Tin does not claim that the containers imported by it cannot be used more than once only that that is not their primary purpose. [11] There are two difficulties with the finding of the court below. First, nowhere in the tariff heading is there any requirement of durability and permanence. Although support for the finding was found by the court in comparing the aluminium containers with the items described in the explanatory notes, which it regarded as items for permanent or semipermanent kitchen use, there is nothing to suggest that these containers were not durable or at least of a semi-permanent nature, nor that they need to be such in order to be articles for use in a kitchen. Counsel for The Baking Tin argued that the containers were intended to be disposable. He did concede that they could be used more than once when the food initially prepared in them had been consumed. But that, The Baking Tin contends, was not their
6 6 primary purpose, which is for the baking of pies and other food, and as packaging for pre-prepared food. [12] The second difficulty with the reasoning of the high court is that it is well-established that the intention of the manufacturer or importer of goods is not a determinant of the appropriate classification for the purpose of the Act. 4 Thus the purpose for which they are manufactured is not a criterion to be taken into account in classification. In Commissioner, SARS v Komatsu Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd 5 this court said: It is clear from the authorities that the decisive criterion for the customs classification of goods is the objective characteristics and properties of the goods as determined at the time of their presentation for customs clearance. This is an internationally recognised principle of tariff classification. The subjective intention of the designer or what the importer does with the goods after importation are, generally, irrelevant considerations. But they need not be because they may in a given situation be relevant in determining the nature, characteristics and properties of the goods. 6 [13] The last sentence of this passage is invoked by The Baking Tin in support of its argument that the intention of the designer, or the use to which the goods are put, may affect what appear to be the objective characteristics of the goods and thus change their classification. It seems to me, however, that the court was suggesting no more than that light may be thrown on the characteristics of the article by subjective factors. The principle remains the same: it is not the intention with which they are made, nor the use to which they may be put, that characterise the containers in question. It is their objective characteristics. Thus the mere fact that the containers are regarded as disposable by The Baking Tin, and perhaps other suppliers and manufacturers in the chain, does not necessarily make them disposable by nature. 4 See, for example, African Oxygen Ltd v Secretary, Customs & Excise 1969 (3) SA 391 (T) at 394D-E and 397B-C (2) SA 157 (SCA) para 8. See the further authorities cited in the footnotes to para 8. 6 See African Oxygen above at 397F-G, where the court said that tariff headings may themselves refer to the intention of the importer or prospective user of the goods.
7 7 [14] The chapter notes set out above do not, as I have said, indicate that in order for the containers to fall under the heading they must be durable or of a permanent nature. And in any event the objective characteristics of the articles do not preclude re-use as a kitchen article. The heading, moreover, includes items such as pot scourers, scouring or polishing pads, and gloves. It is clear to me, therefore, that it was not intended to apply only to rigid articles of a durable nature. [15] A connected argument raised by The Baking Tin was that in the explanatory notes relating to iron and steel kitchenware and household articles, the items are said to be for household use, and then list a number of other places where they may be used, such as hotels, hospitals, canteens, restaurants... etc. The Baking Tin, however, supplies the containers to wholesalers, who in turn supply to manufacturers who use them in industrial kitchens, which are not specified in the notes. However, apart from the fact that the notes are not exhaustive, and are but guides to interpreting the headings (International Business Machines 7 ) they make it plain, by the use of the term etcetera that articles used in other environments may be included. There is thus no merit in this contention. In my view, therefore, the court below was incorrect in finding that the containers did not fall under tariff heading [16] The second question remains: are these containers hollowware? Various dictionary definitions were placed before us. The simplest is in The New Oxford Dictionary of English which defines it as hollow articles of cookware or crockery, such as pots, kettles and jugs. Hollowware is to be contrasted with flatware, defined (in the same dictionary) as relatively flat items of crockery such as plates and saucers. Counsel for The Baking Tin conceded that the containers are not flatware: their depth differs, but is not 7 The passage cited above.
8 8 insignificant, ranging up to three centimetres in height: they have sides and none is flat. There is no minimum depth that the hollow must have. The aluminium containers are in my view hollowware. Accordingly, the Commissioner s determination in this regard was also correct. [17] The appeal is upheld with costs. The order of the court below is set aside and replaced by: The tariff determination of the imported goods under tariff heading is confirmed. The appeal is dismissed with costs. Concur: Scott JA Brand JA Maya JA Mhlantla AJA C H Lewis Judge of Appeal
FOXCROFT, J : This is an appeal in terms of section 47(9)(e) of the. Customs and Excise Act, No 91 of 1964 [ the Customs Act ] against
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA CAPE OF GOOD HOPE PROVINCIAL DIVISION CASE NO : 6067/2005 In the matter between : THE BAKING TIN [PROPRIETARY] LIMITED Applicant and THE MINISTER OF FINANCE N.O Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG BCE FOOD SERVICE EQUIPMENT (PTY) LIMITED
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NUMBER: 27898/2015 DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: YES (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES (3) REVISED:
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT COMMISSIONER FOR THE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE TERRAPLAS SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: CASE NO:375/2013 Reportable COMMISSIONER FOR THE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE Appellant and TERRAPLAS SOUTH AFRICA (PTY)
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT FISH HOEK PRIMARY SCHOOL. Respondent. (642/2008) [2009] ZASCA 144 (26 November 2009)
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case no: 642 / 2008 FISH HOEK PRIMARY SCHOOL Appellant and G W Respondent Neutral citation: Fish Hoek Primary School v G W (642/2008) [2009]
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT SOUTH AFRICAN LOCAL AUTHORITIES PENSION FUND
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 994/2013 In the matter between: SOUTH AFRICAN LOCAL AUTHORITIES PENSION FUND APPELLANT and MSUNDUZI MUNICIPALITY RESPONDENT Neutral
More informationCAPE TOWN IRON & STEEL
Case No 70/95 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the matter between SA METAL & MACHINERY CO (PTY) LTD APPELLANT and CAPE TOWN IRON & STEEL WORKS (PTY) LTD NATIONAL METAL (PTY)
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Reportable Case Number : 364 / 05 In the matter between A MELAMED FINANCE (PTY) LTD APPELLANT and VOC INVESTMENTS LTD RESPONDENT Coram
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. BRUCE E McGREGOR APPELLANT CORPCOM OUTDOOR (PTY) LTD APPELLANT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Not reportable Case no: 89/06 In the matter between: BRUCE E McGREGOR APPELLANT CORPCOM OUTDOOR (PTY) LTD APPELLANT FIRST SECOND and CITY OF
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION)
Case No 172/94 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the appeal of : G I MARKETING CC Appellant and I FRASER-JOHNSTON Respondent CORAM: CORBETT CJ, E M GROSSKOPF, NESTADT, HARMS
More informationJUDGMENT. Belet Industries CC t/a Belet Cellular. MTN Service Provider (Pty) Ltd
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 936/2013 Not Reportable In the matter between: Belet Industries CC t/a Belet Cellular Appellant and MTN Service Provider (Pty) Ltd Respondent
More informationTHE COMPETITION APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (SITTING IN CAPE TOWN)
THE COMPETITION APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (SITTING IN CAPE TOWN) In the matter between 139/CAC/Feb16 GROUP FIVE LTD APPELLANT and THE COMPETITION COMMISSION FIRST RESPONDENT Coram: DAVIS JP, ROGERS
More informationMEC: EDUCATION - WESTERN CAPE v STRAUSS JUDGMENT
MEC: EDUCATION - WESTERN CAPE v STRAUSS FORUM : SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL JUDGE : MALAN AJA CASE NO : 640/06 DATE : 28 NOVEMBER 2007 JUDGMENT Judgement: Malan AJA: [1] This is an appeal with leave of the
More informationIN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG Reportable Case no: JA 80/16 In the matter between: PARDON RUKWAYA AND 31 OTHERS Appellants and THE KITCHEN BAR RESTAURANT Respondent Heard: 03 May 2017
More informationTHE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT CAPE TOWN
Of interest to other judges THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA HELD AT CAPE TOWN In the matter between: Case No: C 147/15 J I DU PREEZ Applicant and SOUTH AFRICAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT BARGAINING COUNCIL ( SALGBC
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Fhetani v S [2007] JOL 20663 (SCA) Issue Order Reportable CASE NO 158/2007 In the matter between TAKALANI FHETANI Appellant and THE STATE Respondent Coram: Nugent,
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 211/2014 Reportable In the matter between: IAN KILBURN APPELLANT and TUNING FORK (PTY) LTD RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Kilburn v Tuning Fork
More informationCONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: Case CCT 208/17 ALAN GEORGE MARSHALL N.O. RENE PIETER DE WET N.O. KNOWLEDGE LWAZI MBOYI N.O. JOHN ANDREW DE BLAQUIERE MARTIN N.O. RAY SIPHOSOMHLE
More informationSLIP OF COCONUT OIL CENTRAL EXCISE TARIFF CLASSIFICATION BASED ON QUANTITY
A Publication from Creative Connect International Publisher Group 172 SLIP OF COCONUT OIL CENTRAL EXCISE TARIFF CLASSIFICATION BASED ON QUANTITY Written by Rohan Naik 3rd Year BBA LLB Student, School of
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No: 466/07 In the matter between MUTUAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (TVL) (PTY) LTD APPELLANT and KOMATI DAM JOINT VENTURE RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Mutual
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Case number 90/2004 Reportable In the matter between: NORTHERN FREE STATE DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY APPELLANT and VG MATSHAI RESPONDENT
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Case number : 521/06 Reportable In the matter between : BODY CORPORATE OF GREENACRES APPELLANT and GREENACRES UNIT 17 CC GREENACRES UNIT 18 CC FIRST RESPONDENT
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: Reportable Case No: 1036/2016 ROAD ACCIDENT FUND APPELLANT and KHOMOTSO POLLY MPHIRIME RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Road Accident
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT REPORTABLE Case No: 244/13 In the matter between: GRANCY PROPERTY LIMITED AND ANOTHER Appellants and SEENA MARENA INVESTMENT (PTY) LTD AND OTHERS Respondents
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT RED CORAL INVESTMENTS (PTY) LTD CAPE PENINSULA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 498/2017 In the matter between Reportable RED CORAL INVESTMENTS (PTY) LTD APPELLANT and CAPE PENINSULA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY RESPONDENT
More informationCase No. 265/89. and CANDY WORLD (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED. Judgment by: NESTADT JA
Case No. 265/89 MARS INCORPORATED APPELLANT and CANDY WORLD (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED RESPONDENT Judgment by: NESTADT JA Case No 265/89 /CCC IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In the
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
In the matter between: THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT NOT REPORTABLE Case no: 513/2013 ANSAFON (PTY) LTD DIAMOND CORE RESOURCES (PTY) LTD FIRST APPELLANT SECOND APPELLANT and THE
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: JUDGMENT Not reportable Case No: 208/2015 MUTUAL & FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED FIRST APPELLANT AQUA TRANSPORT & PLANT HIRE (PTY)
More informationCONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: Case CCT 172/16 SOUTH AFRICAN RIDING FOR THE DISABLED ASSOCIATION Applicant and REGIONAL LAND CLAIMS COMMISSIONER SEDICK SADIEN EBRAHIM SADIEN
More informationDEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY NOTICE 818 OF 2015
Trade and Industry, Department of/ Handel en Nywerheid, Departement van 100 No. 39074 GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 7 AUGUST 2015 DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY NOTICE 818 OF 2015 818 Customs And Excise Act: Guidelines
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable CASE NO: 82/2015 In the matter between: TRUSTCO GROUP INTERNATIONAL (PTY) LTD APPELLANT and VODACOM (PTY) LTD THE REGISTRAR OF PATENTS FIRST
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT PRIMAT CONSTRUCTION CC
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 1075/2016 In the matter between: PRIMAT CONSTRUCTION CC APPELLANT and NELSON MANDELA BAY METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY RESPONDENT Neutral
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. Stand 242 Hendrik Potgieter Road Ruimsig Pty) Ltd v Göbel
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: JUDGMENT Case no: 246/10 Stand 242 Hendrik Potgieter Road Ruimsig (Pty) Ltd Nils Brink van Zyl First Appellant Second Appellant and Christine
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case no: 162/10 In the matter between: THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE SOUTH AFRICAN REVENUE SERVICE and SAIRA ESSA PRODUCTIONS CC SAIRA ESSA MARK CORLETT
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT HOS+MED MEDICAL AID SCHEME
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable CASE NO:015/07 In the matter between HOS+MED MEDICAL AID SCHEME APPELLANT and THEBE YA BOPHELO HEALTHCARE MARKETING & CONSULTING
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Non-Reportable THE MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Non-Reportable In the matter between: Case no: 1040/2017 ANDILE SILATSHA APPELLANT and THE MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONDENT Neutral citation:
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter of: and
Case No 385/97 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter of: and THE STATE Respondant CORAM : VAN HEERDEN, HEFER et SCOTT JJA HEARD : 21 MAY 1998 DELIVERED : 27 MAY 1998 JUDGEMENT SCOTT
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case no 332/08 In the matter between: ABSA BROKERS (PTY) LTD Appellant and RMB FINANCIAL SERVICES RMB ASSET MANAGEMENT (PTY) LTD MOMENTUM DISTRIBUTION
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. THANDI SHERYL MAQUBELA (Accused 1 in the Court a quo)
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 821/2015 In the matter between: THANDI SHERYL MAQUBELA APPELLANT (Accused 1 in the Court a quo) and THE STATE RESPONDENT Neutral
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA. WELTMANS CUSTOM OFFICE FURNITURE Appellant
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: WELTMANS CUSTOM OFFICE FURNITURE Appellant (PTY) LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) and WHISTLERS CC Respondent CORAM : HEFER, NIENABER, SCHUTZ,
More informationCONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT 59/09 [2010] ZACC 6 In the matter between: INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION Applicant and SCAW SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD Respondent with BRIDON INTERNATIONAL
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case no: 339/09 MEC FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY Appellant (EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE) and TEMBA MTOKWANA Respondent Neutral citation: 2010) CORAM: MEC v Mtokwana
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: THULAMELA MUNICIPALITY THE MUNICIPAL MANAGER: THULAMELA MUNICIPALITY Not Reportable Case no: 78/2014 FIRST APPELLANT SECOND APPELLANT
More informationCONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT 41/99 JÜRGEN HARKSEN Appellant versus THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS: CAPE OF GOOD
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, DURBAN JUDGMENT
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, DURBAN JUDGMENT Reportable Case no. D552/12 In the matter between: HEALTH AND OTHER SERVICES PERSONNEL TRADE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA TM SOMERS First
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA WORKERS UNION ISAAC MOITHERI MATHYE KEGOMODITSWE EUPHODIA TSATSI
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO: 62/05 Reportable In the matter between: NATIONAL EDUCATION, HEALTH AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION ISAAC MOITHERI MATHYE 1 st Appellant 2 nd Appellant and
More informationSUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. BLUE CHIP 2 (PTY) LTD t/a BLUE CHIP 49 CEDRICK DEAN RYNEVELDT & 26 OTHERS
SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 499/2015 In the matter between: BLUE CHIP 2 (PTY) LTD t/a BLUE CHIP 49 APPELLANT and CEDRICK DEAN RYNEVELDT & 26 OTHERS RESPONDENTS
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. LUC ARTHUR FRANCE CHRETIEN First Appellant CAROL ANNE CHRETIEN Second Appellant
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 52/09 LUC ARTHUR FRANCE CHRETIEN First Appellant CAROL ANNE CHRETIEN Second Appellant and LINDA STEWART BELL Respondent Neutral citation:
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA RUSTENBURG PLATINUM MINES LIMITED INDUSTRIAL MAINTENANCE PAINTING SERVICES CC
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No: 448/07 RUSTENBURG PLATINUM MINES LIMITED Appellant and INDUSTRIAL MAINTENANCE PAINTING SERVICES CC Respondent Neutral citation: Rustenburg Platinum
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 118/2010 In the matter between: SENWES LIMITED APPELLANT v THE COMPETITION COMMISSION OF SOUTH AFRICA RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Senwes v
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 754/2012 In the matter between: SOLENTA AVIATION (PTY) LTD Appellant and AVIATION @ WORK (PTY) LIMITED Respondent Neutral citation:
More informationSulo MGB Australia Pty Ltd and Comptroller-General of Customs [2018] AATA 1324 (17 May 2018)
Sulo MGB Australia Pty Ltd and Comptroller-General of Customs [2018] AATA 1324 (17 May 2018) Division: GENERAL DIVISION File Number(s): 2015/2533 Re: Sulo MGB Australia Pty Ltd APPLICANT And Comptroller-General
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT HAWKINS HAWKINS & OSBORN (SOUTH) (PTY) LTD ENVIROSERVE WASTE MANAGEMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 3/2008 HAWKINS HAWKINS & OSBORN (SOUTH) (PTY) LTD Appellant and ENVIROSERVE WASTE MANAGEMENT Respondent Neutral citation: Hawkins
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable In the matter between: Case no: 288/2017 OCEAN ECHO PROPERTIES 327 CC FIRST APPELLANT ANGELO GIANNAROS SECOND APPELLANT and OLD MUTUAL LIFE
More informationGENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFES AND TRADE FIRST SESSION OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES PROTOCOL OF TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS TO THE AGREEMENT
r RESTRICTED GATT/l/7 in 3 March 19^8 - v GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFES AND TRADE FIRST SESSION OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES PROTOCOL OF TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS TO THE AGREEMENT There is attached a list of rectifications
More informationDistrict Council of Black River (Collection and Disposal of Refuse) Regulations 2013
District Council of Black River (Collection and Disposal of Refuse) Regulations 2013 GN 80/2014 Government Gazette of Mauritius No. 42 of 10 May 2014 THE DISTRICT COUNCIL OF BLACK RIVER (COLLECTION AND
More informationWTO ANALYTICAL INDEX Agreement on Agriculture Article 4 (Jurisprudence)
1 ARTICLE 4... 2 1.1 Text of Article 4... 2 1.2 General... 2 1.2.1 Purpose of Article 4... 2 1.3 Article 4.1... 3 1.4 Article 4.2... 3 1.4.1 "any measures which have been required to be converted into
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT CASE NO: 297/2013 Reportable In the matter between: DEAN OF THE LAW FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH WEST First Appellant VICE CHANCELLOR OF THE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No 427/96 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In die matter of: GNH OFFICE AUTOMATION C.C. First Appellant NAUGIS INVESTMENTS C.C. Second Appellant and PROVINCIAL
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT RIVERSDALE MINING LIMITED
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 536/2016 In the matter between: RIVERSDALE MINING LIMITED APPELLANT and JOHANNES JURGENS DU PLESSIS CHRISTO M ELOFF SC FIRST RESPONDENT
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA REPORTABLE Case number: 29/04 In the matter between: EKKEHARD CREUTZBURG EMIL EICH Appellant 1 st Appellant 2 nd and COMMERCIAL BANK
More information[1] Applicant seeks an interdict restraining respondent from infringing copyright
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) In the matter between: Reportable CASE NO: 20147/2014 NESTLE NESPRESSO S.A Applicant And SECRET RIVER TRADING CC t/a CAFFELUXE DISTRIBUTORS
More informationTHE BODY CORPORATE, ELLA COURT JUDGMENT. [1] On 20 August 2008 the Applicants, the residents of some premises that are
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WITWATERSRAND LOCAL DIVISION) CASE NO: 07/22463 In the matter between: PE KHOZA AND 17 OTHERS Applicants and THE BODY CORPORATE, ELLA COURT Respondent JUDGMENT NOTSHE
More informationClassification of Parts and Accessories in the Customs Tariff. In Brief
Ottawa, May 13, 2014 Memorandum D10-0-1 Classification of Parts and Accessories in the Customs Tariff In Brief The editing revisions made in this memorandum do not affect or change any of the existing
More informationAppeals DECISION AND REASONS. Appeal No. AP The Home Depot Canada. President of the Canada Border Services Agency
Canadian International Trade Tribunal Tribunal canadien du commerce extérieur CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADE TRIBUNAL Appeals DECISION AND REASONS Appeal No. AP-2014-026 The Home Depot Canada v. President
More informationThere are no direct fiscal impacts associated with the staff recommendation.
MEETING DATE: November 16, 2016 PREPARED BY: Erik Steenblock, Environmental Programs Manager DEPT. DIRECTOR: Paul Malone (Interim) DEPARTMENT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: Karen P. Brust SUBJECT: SECOND
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF OF SOUTH AFRICA
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OF SOUTH AFRICA APPEAL REPORTABLE Case Number : 010 / 2002 In the matter between ROY SELWYN COHEN Appellant and BRENDA COHEN (born Coleman) Respondent Composition
More informationAppeals DECISION AND REASONS. Appeal No. AP Canadian Tire Corporation Limited. President of the Canada Border Services Agency
Canadian International Trade Tribunal Tribunal canadien du commerce extérieur CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL TRADE TRIBUNAL Appeals DECISION AND REASONS Appeal No. AP-2004-057 Canadian Tire Corporation Limited
More informationJUDGMENT (For delivery)
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT 28/13 [2013] ZACC 20 In the matter between: HUGH GLENISTER Applicant and PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA MINISTER FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY MINISTER
More informationCONCESSIONAIRE AGREEMENT. This Concessionaire Agreement is made this. day of September Between MAIN EVENT CATERING (PTY) Ltd ( CONCESSIONAIRE )
CONCESSIONAIRE AGREEMENT This Concessionaire Agreement is made this day of September 2018 Between MAIN EVENT CATERING (PTY) Ltd ("MEC") and ( CONCESSIONAIRE ) ID NUMBER Annexure included and attached to
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT CITY OF TSHWANE METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case no:502/12 In the matter between: CITY OF TSHWANE METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY Appellant and THOMAS MATHABATHE NEDBANK LIMITED First Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE CIRCUIT COURT, EAST LONDON) BLUE NIGHTINGALE TRADING 397 (PTY) LTD t/a SIYENZA GROUP
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE CIRCUIT COURT, EAST LONDON) REPORTABLE CASE NO. EL881/15 ECD 1681/15 In the matter between: BLUE NIGHTINGALE TRADING 397 (PTY) LTD t/a SIYENZA GROUP Applicant
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. ethekwini MUNICIPALITY
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 1068/2016 In the matter between: ethekwini MUNICIPALITY APPELLANT and MOUNTHAVEN (PTY) LTD RESPONDENT Neutral citation: ethekwini
More informationFood Service Ordinances
Northeast District Department of Health 69 South Main Street, Unit 4 Brooklyn, Connecticut 06234 Phone 860-774-7350 Fax 860-774-1308 www.nddh.org Food Service Ordinances Information on Inspections, Permits,
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO: 588/2007 THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY Appellant and AUGUSTUS JOHN DE WITT Respondent Neutral citation: Minister of Safety and Security v De Witt
More informationIN THE NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO: 7585/2010 In the matter between: AGRI WIRE (PTY) LIMITED AGRI WIRE UPINGTON (PTY) LIMITED First Applicant Second Applicant and
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT MANONG & ASSOCIATES (PTY) LTD. EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE 1 st Respondent NATIONAL TREASURY
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 331/08 MANONG & ASSOCIATES (PTY) LTD Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF ROADS & TRANSPORT, EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE 1 st Respondent NATIONAL
More informationA Comparison of the Application of the Carborundum Factors in the Original Decision to
A Comparison of the Application of the Carborundum Factors in the Original Decision to Applications in Recent Decisions of the Court of International Trade and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT In the matters between: Case No: 440/10 MASIXOLE PAKULE Appellant and MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY First Respondent THE STATION COMMISSIONER, MTHATHA CENTRAL
More informationADJUSTING IMPORTS OF STEEL INTO THE UNITED STATES BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A PROCLAMATION
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 03/15/2018 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2018-05478, and on FDsys.gov ADJUSTING IMPORTS OF STEEL INTO THE UNITED
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA CRONIMET CHROME PROPERTIES (PTY) LTD
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 851/12 Not reportable In the matter between: CRONIMET CHROME MINING SA (PTY) LTD FIRST APPELLANT CRONIMET CHROME SA (PTY) LTD SECOND APPELLANT
More informationIN THE NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA /ES (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) D F S FLEMINGO SA (PTY) LTD AIRPORTS COMPANY SOUTH AFRICA LTD JUDGMENT
IN THE NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA /ES (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) CASE NO: 70057/2009 Date:17/05/2012 NOT REPORTABLE IN THE MATTER BETWEEN: D F S FLEMINGO SA (PTY) LTD APPLICANT AND AIRPORTS COMPANY
More informationFood Service Ordinances
Northeast District Department of Health 69 South Main Street, Unit 4 Brooklyn, Connecticut 06234 Phone 860-774-7350 Fax 860-774-1308 www.nddh.org Food Service Ordinances Information on Inspections, Permits,
More informationMINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES JUDGMENT. [1] In accordance to an agreement which was reached between the
Not Reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION PORT ELIZABETH In the matter between: Case No: 3509/2012 Date Heard: 15/08/2016 Date Delivered: 1/09/2016 ANDILE SILATHA Plaintiff
More informationIN HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL DIVISION, PIETERMARITZBURG
IN HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU-NATAL DIVISION, PIETERMARITZBURG CASE NO: 2671/2016P DATE: 7 OCTOBER 2016 In the matter between: CANNON SOUTH AFRICA APPLICANT and THE COMMISSIONER: SOUTH AFRICA REVENUE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGMENT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SWAZILAND JUDGMENT In the matter between: Civil Case No.06/2015 SWAZILAND REVENUE AUTHORITY Applicant And IMPUNZI WHOLESALERS (PTY) LTD. Respondent Neutral citation: Swaziland Revenue
More informationCity Of Chilliwack. Bylaw No A Bylaw to regulate used and second hand goods
City Of Chilliwack Bylaw No. 3078 A Bylaw to regulate used and second hand goods WHEREAS Council considers it necessary to regulate the business of buying and selling used and second hand goods and scrap
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION)
62/87 /mb IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (APPELLATE DIVISION) In tne matter between: THE STATE APPELLANT AND RENé HORN RESPONDENT CORAM : CORBETT, KUMLEBEN, JJA et BOSHOFF, AJA HEARD : 22 MARCH 1988
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: CASE NUMBER: 4/95 ENSIGN-BICKFORD (SOUTH AFRICA) (PTY) LIMITED BULK MINING EXPLOSIVES (PTY) LIMITED DANTEX EXPLOSIVES (PTY) LIMITED 1st
More informationCHAPTER 60 HEALTH AND SANITATION GARBAGE SERVICE GARBAGE DISPOSAL AT CITY DUMP. Disposal of garbage, trash and waste matter
CHAPTER 60 HEALTH AND SANITATION SECTION 60.02 SECTION 60.03 SECTION 60.04 SECTION 60.24 Garbage Service Garbage Disposal at City Dump Refuse Penalties GARBAGE SERVICE SECTION 60.02.010 SECTION 60.02.220
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISON)
2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (TRANSVAAL PROVINCIAL DIVISON) UNREPORTABLE In the matter between: Case No: 35420 / 03 Date heard: 17 & 21/02/2006 Date of judgment: 4/8/2006 PAUL JACOBUS SMIT PLAINTIFF
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case No: 104/2011 Reportable In the matter between: CITY OF CAPE TOWN APPELLANT and MARCEL MOUZAKIS STRÜMPHER RESPONDENT Neutral citation: City of Cape
More information[TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA, EXTRAORDINARY, PART II, SECTION 3, SUB-SECTION (i)]
[TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA, EXTRAORDINARY, PART II, SECTION 3, SUB-SECTION (i)] GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Revenue) Notification No. 131/2016 - CUSTOMS (N.T.)
More informationWORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION WT/DS269/13 20 February 2006 (06-0702) Original: English EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES CUSTOMS CLASSIFICATION OF FROZEN BONELESS CHICKEN CUTS ARB-2005-4/21 Arbitration under Article 21.3(c)
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT STAMFORD SALES & DISTRIBUTION (PTY) LIMITED METRACLARK (PTY) LIMITED
In the matter between: THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT REPORTABLE Case No: 676/2013 STAMFORD SALES & DISTRIBUTION (PTY) LIMITED APPELLANT and METRACLARK (PTY) LIMITED RESPONDENT Neutral
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: Case No: 115/12 THE MINISTER OF DEFENCE APPELLANT and LEON MARIUS VON BENECKE RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Minister of Defence
More informationMEC FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO: CA 337/2013 DATE HEARD: 18/8/14 DATE DELIVERED: 22/8/14 REPORTABLE In the matter between: IKAMVA ARCHITECTS CC APPELLANT and MEC FOR
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 2014/12763 DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: YES/NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED
More informationCASE NO. 495/96. In the matter between AND SMALBERGER, NIENABER, SCHUTZ, SCOTT. and ZULMAN JJA HEARD: 16 SEPTEMBER 1997 DELIVERED: 26 SEPTEMBER 1997
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA CASE NO. 495/96 In the matter between EDUARDO FERNANDES BRAZ APPELLANT AND REFINO DA SILVA AFONSO FIRST RESPONDENT AND MANUEL JOSE
More informationCOMESA - Rules and Publications:
COMESA - Rules and Publications: PROTOCOL ON THE RULES OF ORIGIN FOR PRODUCTS TO BE TRADED BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE COMMON MARKET FOR EASTERN AND SOUTHERN AFRICA PREAMBLE THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES
More informationALERT DISPUTE RESOLUTION ISSUE IN THIS 30 NOVEMBER 2016 CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING:
30 NOVEMBER 2016 DISPUTE RESOLUTION ALERT IN THIS ISSUE CONSTRUCTION AND ENGINEERING: In the recent judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in the matter of Padachie v The Body Corporate of Crystal
More information